Adrian Crum wrote: > David and I are in agreement on the end result, and this point is where > we disagree. Like you, David wants all changes to be made in the branch. > I don't think a branch is needed. The interface extractions can be done > a little at a time in the trunk. > > A branch with the kind of extensive changes that are planned will open > up a HUGE can of worms when it is merged with the trunk. Consider that > this one interface extraction resulted in three bug reports - what would > happen if we introduced dozens of interface extractions in a single commit?
I agree with you as well, this does *not* need to be done in a separate branch. However, what you did by doing the last step first, in trunk, is the wrong approach. * Adding a new interface to some base component does not break unreleated code(short amount of time). * Implementing said interface by an existing object does not break unreleated code(short amount of time). * Modifying other code to use the interface does not break unrelated code(takes a long time to do, and can be done incrementally by many people). * When other code no longer references concrete class, then remove/rename it(breaks unreleated code, but that needs to be announced, not just discussed). This set of changes does *not* need to be done in a hole; it can be done incrementally.
